What resouces available also depends on the format of residents participation in urban planning.  For example, a homeowners association is a form of participation; an NGO is another form of residents participation; so are public hearing, survey, etc.  I think it's more meaningful to talk about resources available to residents in a particular form of participation.  Of course, these two matters (resources and participation format) may be related in a simultaneous and complex way.

Hi, i suggest you to have a look at the Japanese machizukuri concept. Machizukuri' or literally 'community-making' is one of the most popular planning-related keywords in the contemporary East Asia. It is a kind of people's community movement that started in the post-war Japan, as a civil society reaction to negative environmental and social consequences of rapid economic growth and has evolved to become a diverse approach to wider community action.

Followings are some article on this concept.

Thanks.

I suggest you look at the concept of community capacity. This can be strengthened and measured and there are a number of publications and tools available-see my RG contributions as a guide.

You may also add to your reading list our recently published special issue, 'Self-organizing City', which discusses citizen engagement and urban planning.

Have you read Saul Alinsky's work---the community is the resource

Thank you Karen, I read his book years ago. As far as I know he didn't accomplish his PhD. If you want to understand the state of the art, you have to read my recent book published by Spriner and my article mentioned above. Best wishes, Tal Berman

Thank you Annuska. The connection between public participation and the concept of self-organising city is highly important and it is discussed in my recent book published by Springer (see subsection 7.3). You should have mentioned my idea and cited it in your article. Best wishes, Tal Berman

Thank you Tal for your comments and recommendations.

Dear Chee, thank you for the information on the Japanese machizukuri concept - very interesting. Glenn Laverack.

Hi Tal, I've been looking at this issue from the governance perspective. Communities are often divided when it comes to planning issues as a result of the the complexity of the planning decision they are tackling. There are often complex socio-economic trade-offs when seeking to challenge higher authorities on significant planning matters. This can be used as a means of dividing and conquering the local community and ensuring the higher authorities wishes are achieved. So we found helping communities to establish an agonistic, rather than antagonistic, method of deliberation helps strengthen their social capital as they seek to incorporate local knowledge in the planning process. They can then speak with one voice to the higher authority or when planning for themselves. To do this we've developed a theatre based method of community planning. Happy to share the research if you are interested. Paul

Paul Cowie, I am proud that you have already adopted some of my conceptual ideas

Dear Tal,

What strikes me from both the research literature and speaking to practitioners is that communities need to learn the language of planning. So "yes" to planning knowledge, which can require resources such as the ability to draw plans, as would be the case for neighbourhood planning, for example in the UK. There are many problems related to this, such as the fact that neighbouhood planning relies on a lot of work from just few community volunteers, the costs of getting consultancy services and advice (for example to conduct Strategic Environmental Assessment), and the insufficient guidance and support provided by local planners, despite all good intentions. There are many articles about different challenges of neighbourhood planning for communities. E.g.:

Parker, G., Lynn, T., & Wargent, M. (2017). Contestation and conservatism in neighbourhood planning in England: reconciling agonism and collaboration?. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(3), 446-465.

Communities also need to be able to speak the language of maps, but there might be a gap between local authorities' acceptance of community maps (e.g. Participatory GIS), and mapping processes led by local authorities (e.g. Public Participatory GIS) which are framed and might not enable communities to discuss substantive alternatives to existing planning proposals. See this article about the shortcomings of PGIS relative to the post-political condition.

Radil, S. M., & Anderson, M. B. (2018). Rethinking PGIS: Participatory or (post)political GIS? Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517750774

Diagnostic/needs analysis as an early planning phase is perhaps the best time to start integrating community issues early on in the planning process. As you know most researchers and practitioners advocate early community engagement, before proposals have been made.

Finally, the will to integrate community views and knowledge is first and foremost the result of political will. It can also take time to get local services and even communties thjemselves to understand the value of participation, especially at a time of distrusto or loss of faith in big politics and government.

Thank you Ian for your interesting answer. Please have a look at my article: "When knowledge is power: grassroots participatory initiative as a process of resource development" - you may find this article relevant to the comments you mentioned in your answer.